This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.

Introduction

When Hungary transitioned from a one-party state to a parliamentary democracy in 1989-1990, very few people were using the internet in the country. In the following years, dial-up connections spread and the number of users expanded, particularly in the 2000s when the price of internet started to decrease while broadband connections increased. Today, a large majority of the population is online.[1] Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are being used not only for social activities and newsgathering, but also increasingly for political activism. ICTs in Hungary are not censored centrally but they are monitored by the national security services.

In the 2010 parliamentary elections, the conservative Hungarian Civic Union (Fidesz) and its ally, the Christian Democratic People's Party (KDNP), won a landslide victory gaining more than two-thirds of the seats, which enabled them to draft and accept a set of laws regulating the media, including the 2010 media regulation, which has provisions regulating online newspapers and news portals. A new media regulatory authority, the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (NMHH), was also established to oversee the telecommunications industry and has the power to penalize or suspend news portals that violate stipulations of the media regulation. While the media regulation threatens to have a chilling effect on journalism, the Hungarian Constitutional Court ruled that some stipulations of the media regulation were unconstitutional in December 2011.

Hungary adopted a new constitution in April 2011 that includes provisions regulating the telecommunications industry and media as a whole.[2] The new constitution also created the National Agency for Data Protection whose independence has been called into question due to the political appointment process of the agency's leadership.

Obstacles to Access

According to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), internet penetration in Hungary stood at 59 percent in 2011,[3] up from 47 percent in 2006, while the National Media and Infocommunications Authority of Hungary (NMHH) reported in late 2011 that 54.5 percent of households have a broadband internet subscription.[4] The ITU and NMHH also recorded a mobile phone penetration rate of 117.3 percent and 2,155,000 mobile internet subscriptions in 2011.[5] Dial-up internet service is not widely used, and nearly 70 percent of residential areas have 3G coverage.[6] Nevertheless, 28 percent of the population had never used the internet in 2011, according to Eurostat statistics.[7]

There are geographical, socioeconomic, and ethnic differences in Hungary's internet penetration, with low access rates found in rural areas[8] and among the Roma community, the country's largest ethnic minority.[9] Most internet users access the internet from home, work, and school, while access at internet cafes and telecottages (local community centers) is less common.[10] There is no need to approve the opening of cybercafes.

The Budapest Internet eXchange (BIX) is a network system that maintains the Hungarian internet traffic between domestic internet service providers (ISPs) and is overseen by the Council of Hungarian Internet Service Providers (ISZT)[11] without any governmental interference.[12] Shutting down the BIX would only slow down the internet in Hungary, and as BIX includes a domain name system (DNS) server that translates ".hu" domains, it would cause further difficulties.[13] The government does not restrict bandwidth, routers, and switches,[14] and backbone connections are owned by telecommunications companies.[15] Legally, the internet and other telecommunications services can be paused or limited in case of unexpected attacks, for preemptive defense, or in states of emergency or national crisis.[16]

YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, international blog-hosting services, instant, person-to-person communication, and other Web 2.0 applications are freely available. An increasing number of widely used software and websites are available in Hungarian, and there are several Hungarian blog-hosting sites.[17] By the end of 2011, there were more than 600,000 registered ".hu" domains[18] registered at some 130 companies.[19]

Ten ISPs share 94 percent of the total fixed broadband market,[20] and there are three mobile phone providers that are all privately owned by foreign companies.[21] New actors are entering the mobile phone market in 2012, including a virtual mobile company operated by British Tesco and a mobile frequency tender that was won by a consortium of state-owned companies.[22]

Following the 2010 parliamentary elections and the passage of the 2010 media regulation, the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (NMHH) was also established to oversee the telecommunications industry. Its activities range from mobile phone frequency allocation to telecommunications market surveillance.[23] The Media Council is the NMHH's decision-making body related to media outlets, and its responsibilities include allocating television and radio frequencies and penalizing violations of media regulations. The members of the Media Council are nominated and elected by the governing two-thirds parliamentary majority.[24] The current president of NMHH, a former Fidesz member of parliament, is also the president of the Media Council and was appointed directly by the prime minister for a nine-year term, indicating a lack of independence of the council.[25] As the media authority was established in 2010, it is too early to assess whether its decisions are fair and independent from direct political influence. Nevertheless, a 2011 decision on a regional radio's frequency is considered to be controversial,[26] and all but one of the applicants of a mobile phone frequency tender was rejected by the NMHH based on "formal deficiencies" in 2012.[27]

In the new Hungarian constitution adopted in April 2011, the governing parties prematurely ended the six-year term of the well-functioning Data Protection Commissioner, replacing it with the National Agency for Data Protection. The head of the new agency is nominated by the prime minister, appointed for a nine-year term, and can be dismissed by the president or prime minister on arbitrary grounds,[28] calling into question the independence of the agency.

Limits on Content

Technical filtering and censorship of websites, blogs, or text messages does not exist in Hungary, nor are there methods to prevent users from accessing any content.[29] Anyone can launch a blog, a website, or any kind of online site to freely express his or her opinion. Nevertheless, the 2010 media regulation has some general content regulation provisions concerning online media outlets, particularly if they provide services for a profit. For example, online media outlets bear editorial responsibility if their aim is to distribute content to the public for "information, entertainment or training purposes."[30] A member of the Media Council claimed that a blog qualified as such if it was produced for a living.[31]

The 2010 media regulation also stipulates that media content – both online and offline – may not offend, discriminate or "incite hatred against persons, nations, communities, national, ethnic, linguistic and other minorities or any majority as well as any church or religious groups."[32] Further, human dignity, constitutional order, and human rights must be respected, and privacy and public morals cannot be violated.[33] However, the law does not define the meaning of "any majority" or "public morals." If a news portal does not comply with the law, the Media Council may oblige it to "discontinue its unlawful conduct," publish a notice or the resolution on its front page, or pay a fine of up to 25 million forints (US$124,415). If a site repeatedly violates the stipulations of the media regulation, the intermediary service provider can be obligated to suspend the given domain, and as a last resort, the media authority can delete the site from the administrative registry.[34] An appeal can be brought to the court.

Critics of the 2010 media regulation contend that it operates with unclear provisions and imposes high fines and sanctions on media outlets,[35] which might give rise to uncertainty and fear, lead to self-censorship, and have a chilling effect on journalism as a whole. Nonetheless, no online media outlet has been fined based on the 2010 media regulation, and in December 2011, the Constitutional Court excluded online newspapers and news portals from the scope of the media regulation, effective on May 31, 2012.[36]

Intermediary service providers are not legally responsible for transmitted content if they did not initiate or select the receiver of the transmission, or select or modify the transmitted information.[37] Further, ISPs are also not obliged to verify the content it "transmits, stores or makes available," nor do they need to seek for unlawful activity.[38]

The NMHH operates an internet hotline where disturbing or allegedly unlawful content such as child pornography can be reported. In cases of a "presumably illegal website," the authority asks the content provider to delete the offending content and notifies the police. It is highlighted that the hotline is "not an authority procedure, but an activity undertaken by the National Media and Infocommunications Authority in the name of corporate social responsibility," and it cannot force deletion; rather, it can only "request the removal of the contested content."[39] Cases of copyright infringement are usually considered under civil law and can result in the "destruction of the device or material."[40] However, copyright infringement cases that cause financial injury can be punishable by imprisonment under the Criminal Code.[41]

There is only anecdotal evidence on the extent of online self-censorship in Hungary, which is not due to direct state interference, but to political or economic pressure. As one investigative journalist put it, "the threat of a lawsuit is often enough for Hungarian media companies to publish demanded corrections immediately, without trying to defend their work in court," and the interests of media owners can lead to "excessive self-censorship."[42] A 2006 journalist survey indicated that for online news sites, attempts to apply political or economic pressure were low compared to dailies in the traditional media sphere.[43] However, recent cases suggest that some kind of pressure provoking self-censorship does exist in state-run media.[44]

Since 2011, the state-owned Hungarian News Agency (MTI) has had a virtual monopoly on the market, as most of its news items are freely available. Consequently, media outlets that have been impacted by the economic crisis tend to publish MTI news items. Csaba Belénessy, head of the MTI, said in an interview that "a public service media outlet has to be loyal to the government and fair to the opposition."[45] The media regulation obliges the MTI to produce news bulletins for public service broadcasters and to edit their joint news portal.[46]

The information landscape of online content in Hungary is relatively diverse. The two main news portals in Hungary are Index.hu and Origo.hu, both of which have around 750,000 individual visitors daily.[47] Most civil society organizations have websites, and an increasing number of them have a presence on Facebook. There are some media outlets, including online portals, for the minority Roma community.[48] Members of LGBT community and religious groups have their online sources and forums as well.

Nevertheless, Hungarian society is politically divided, as is the press, and partisan journalism is widespread.[49] Blogs are generally considered an opinion genre and do not express independent or balanced news. According to an unrepresentative survey, 46.5 percent of blog-readers consume blogs on politics and current affairs, and one of the reasons why people read blogs is because they represent strong opinions.[50] There are also blogs analyzing governmental policies, acts of public figures, and corruption.[51] Trolling is usually moderated where it is possible to comment on articles, typically to prevent negative discussions. However, political trolling has become widespread using fake IDs on Facebook,[52] which has nearly four million users in Hungary as of early 2012.[53]

Facebook has grown increasingly popular in Hungary, especially after the 2010 parliamentary elections.[54] In 2011 and early 2012, many Facebook groups were formed, and several large demonstrations mobilizing tens of thousands of people both for[55] and against the government.[57] and disseminated on other social-networking sites. Protests for social issues were also organized,[58] and there was at least one unannounced protest organized partly via mobile phones.[59] However, the extent of mobile phone use in organizing protests is unknown.

Violations of User Rights

The Fundamental Law of Hungary – drafted and passed in 2011 – acknowledges the right to freedom of expression and defends "freedom and diversity of the press,"[60] however, there are no laws that specifically protect online modes of expression. In January 2012, the European Commission launched infringement proceedings against Hungary at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, partly regarding the independence of the judiciary, which has been threatened by the early retirement of judges over 62 years old and the concentration of Fidesz party members.[61]

The Civil Code recognizes civil rights and poses a ban on insulting an individual's honor.[62] Libel cases demonstrate that the courts generally protect freedom of expression, except when there is a conflict with another basic right. Defamation cases have decreased since a 1994 decision of the Constitutional Court, which claimed that a public figure's tolerance of criticism should be higher than an ordinary citizen's.[63] Nevertheless, Hungarian law does not distinguish between traditional and online media outlets in libel or defamation cases. The Criminal Code bans defamation, slander, the humiliation of national symbols (the anthem, flag, and coat of arms), the dissemination of totalitarian symbols (the swastika and red pentagram), the denial of the sins of national socialism or communism, and public scare-mongering through the media.[64] The Criminal Code has been used "sporadically" in cases of defamation or slander.[65]

The most recent incident occurred in 2008 when the Hungarian Supreme Court found a journalist guilty of libel for describing the famous Hungarian Tokaj wine as "shit" in an article published in both the print and online versions of a daily newspaper. In a positive development, the decision was reversed at the European Court of Human Rights in 2011.[66] Otherwise, no individual has been detained, prosecuted, or sanctioned by the law for disseminating or accessing information political or social issues through ICTs.

Journalists are entitled to "editorial independence and independence of journalism" by law,[68] There are no further distinctions between journalists and everyday citizens or bloggers.

Generally, users who wish to comment on a web article need to register with the website by providing an email address and nick name. The operator of a website might be asked to provide the commenter's internet protocol (IP) address, email or other data in case of an investigation.[69] The 2010 media regulation "blurred the responsibility of the media outlet and the commenter."[70] Consequently, at least one website decided to disable the commenting option in 2011.[71] In July 2011, an inquiry was launched against the online version of the daily Népszava because of a comment that was considered offensive,[72] even though the Media Council stated that comments are not subject to regulation.[73]

There are no restrictions on anonymous communication, and encryption software is freely available without government interference. Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), a data encryption program, is often used by investigative journalists.[74] Nevertheless, to sign a contract with the mobile phone company, users must provide personal data upon purchase of a SIM card.[75]

National security services can collect traffic data (such as caller and recipient phone numbers, SIM cards personal data, the geographic location of the two SIM cards, and the browsing data of certain IP addresses) from telecommunication systems and other data storage devices without a warrant.[76] Further, the authorities have allegedly installed "black boxes" on ISP networks,[77] which allow them to access and record communication transmitted via ICTs, albeit with a warrant.[78] Nevertheless, there is no data on the extent to which they monitor ICTs and how regularly they do it.

In accordance with the EU Directive 2006/24/EC on data retention, ISPs and mobile phone companies need to retain user data for up to one year, including personal data, location, caller phone numbers, the duration of phone conversations, IP addresses, and user IDs for investigative authorities and security services.[79] There is no data on these activities even though there is a legal obligation to provide the European Commission with statistics of the queries for data made by the investigating authorities.[80] Cybercafes, on the other hand, are not required to collect user information, and anyone can access internet at a cybercafe without registration.

Bloggers, ICT users, websites or their property are not subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actors. However, in September 2011, photographers of the news portals, Index.hu and Origo.hu, were banned from parliament because they had allegedly taken pictures of the prime minister's notes.[81] In a separate incident in December 2011, journalists from Index.hu were banned from parliament for being disrespectful after they posted a video of two reporters singing and dancing in the building.[82] The journalists were permitted to enter parliament again roughly a month later. In January 2012, a photographer from Vagy.hu was not admitted to the public ball of Debrecen city because the organizers claimed that the local news site was not registered with the NMHH.[83] These types of incidents impede the ability of journalists to cover the news, compromising the Hungarian news and information landscape.

In response to the Hungary's new 2010 media regulations, the international hacker group Anonymous posted a video on YouTube threatening the Hungarian government with a cyberattack in August 2011.[84] Since then, two sites were attacked by Anonymous via distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks: the website of the National Board Against Counterfeiting in response to the ACTA debate in early 2012, and the personal website of the Minister of State for Education in protest against a new education bill.[85]

10 In 2006 survey where multiple answers could be given, 63 percent of respondents accessed internet from home, 37 percent from work, 24 percent from school, 9 percent from a library, 4 percent from a telecottage, 7 percent from a internet café, 23 percent at a friend's place, and two percent from other places. See, World Internet Project (WIP), Report on the Hungarian Research for the World Internet Project 2007, pg. 39.

16 Act CXIII of 2011 on home defense, Military of Hungary, and the implementable measures under special legal order, Art. 68, par. 5.

17 The largest Hungarian blog hosting site is Blog.hu with over 100,000 blogs, of which 17,000 are updated regularly. See, Cemp Sales House, "Médiaajánlatok" [Media offers], accessed January 27, 2012, http://ajanlat.index.hu/ajanlatok/.

24 Act CLXXXV of 2010, Art. 124. Even if not exclusively the governing party but opposition parties had delegated members, the Media Council would only represent the parliamentary parties, like under the previous media law, thus it would be dependent upon the nominating parties.

61 As the retirement age in case of judges and prosecutors was lowered and as the judiciary system was reorganized in a way that the powers became concentrated in the hands of the new National Judicial Office. "European Commission launches accelerated infringement proceedings against Hungary," European Commission, January 17, 2012, http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/governance/2012-01-18-hungary_en.htm.